PRITPAL SINGH,J - (1.) THE accused Dharam Pal and Satish Kumar are brothers and the accused Sushma is sister. Dharam Pal was married about one year prior to the occurrence and his wife's name was also Sushma. He was employed as an Overseer in the Canal Department and was posted at Mukerian. He and his wife were occupying a Government quarter in the Canal Colony, Mukerian.
(2.) ALLEGATION of the prosecution is that soon after the marriage the deceased Sushma's in laws started harassing her for bringing inadequate dowry. On November 12, 1983 her brother Rajinder Kumar (PW5) came from Amritsar to Mukerian to enquire about her welfare and on reaching the house of Dharam Pal accused he was informed that his sister Sushma had suffered burn injuries and had been taken to the Dayanand Hospital, Ludhiana. He rushed to Ludhiana and reached the hospital at about 6.45 p.m. He found that Sushma was admitted in the casualty ward. When he meet her she informed him that her husband Dharam pal with the help of his brother Satish Kumar and sister Sushma had burnt her by sprinkling kerosene oil on her person. Rajinder Kumar (PW5) contacted his father Amolak Ram (PW6) at Amritsar on telephone and informed him of the occurrence. Amolak Ram immediately came to Ludhiana and reached the hospital and about 11.00 p.m., Sushma had succumbed to the injuries in the meantime. Sub Inspector Harish Kumar of Police Station, Mukerian, (PW7), on receiving information regarding the death of Sushma went to Dayanand Hospital, Ludhiana, and he recorded the statement of Rajinder Kumar (PW5). On the basis of this statement a formal First Information Report was recorded at Police Station, Mukerian, under Section 302 read with section 34 Indian Penal Code, against Dharam Pal, Satish Kumar and Sushma. The accused were arrested on November 21, 1983. Autopsy performed on the body of Sushma by Dr. Kuldip Singh (PW1) revealed that there were superficial to deep burns all over the body. In the opinion of the doctor, Sushma had died due to shock on account of extensive burns and the burns were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
(3.) DURING the course of trial the prosecution placed reliance on the medical evidence and the testimony of Rajinder Kumar (PW5) and Amolak Ram (PW6). The allegations of the prosecution were denied by the accused in their statements under section 313, Code of Criminal Procedure. The accused Satish Kumar and Sushma stated that they are residents of village Bhattian and they were not even present at Mukerian when Sushma deceased suffered burn injuries. Satish Kumar examined M.R. Sethi (DW1) to prove that he was present in D.A.V. High School, Urmur, at the time of occurrence, Dharam Pal accused stated as follows :- "We have been falsely involved in this case. I along with Sushma deceased used to reside happily in my house at Mukerian. On 12.11.1983, I was a away to my working site. At 2.00 p.m. that day I received message from Mukerian that I was summoned to Mukerian by Shri Lamba S.D.O. I immediately reached Mukerian. When I reached my house, I found many persons collected and my wife lying with burn injuries in the verandah. I was told that the first-aid had already been given and that the doctor had advised the shifting of my wife to Ludhiana. I immediately arranged a car and also got a telephone call booked for Amritsar. At about 3.00 p.m., I took my wife in the car started for Ludhiana and reached the casualty ward of Dayanand Hospital at 6.30 p.m. The doctor gave first aid and sent Sushma to the new Dayanand Hospital Surgery ward. But the doctor who attended her on reaching there, declared her dead. The hospital officials then shifted the dead body to the dead-house. I then kept on waiting for all these persons because I had also got a call booked to Amritsar. At about 9.30/10 p.m., my in-laws came there altogether. Leaving them there, I came to my village Bhattian where my parents reside. On the next day when we came to Ludhiana hospital, we came to know that we three, i.e. myself along with two co-accused have been involved in this case. We then moved for anticipatory bail but the same was rejected and then we appeared before the police. We are innocent." ;